Since the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper covered the debate over traditional versus simplified Chinese characters on the front page of its May 8 issue, I feel it is necessary to draw the attention of those who previously have not paid attention to or were not aware of the significance and seriousness of this matter.
I have always thought that it was a huge and unforgivable mistake for the Chinese government to adopt simplified Chinese characters. To say that simplifying Chinese characters makes Chinese people's lives easier is total BS! The people of Hong Kong and Taiwan learn and use the more complicated traditional writing system and never have any problems.
Our Chinese ancestors' beautiful and skillful design of Chinese writing (pictograms or ideograms) immediately conveys the meaning of each character by the components of the character, which resemble the look, action or state of emotion, etc.
By removing or modifying some components or adding some ridiculously unrelated simplified components to the character, the simplified writing becomes totally unrecognizable. Just open a Xin Hua Dictionary which includes both traditional and simplified characters and you will find many examples (and comparisons) that will make you realize how absurd the simplified characters are and how most modifications do not make much sense.
As far as literacy is concerned, I think other factors may be responsible for augmenting literacy in China, such as the much improved gross national and per capita incomes, or the increased migration from rural areas to the cities, but definitely not simplified writing.
Rather, simplified writing might have lowered the literacy level in the entire country, because simplified characters do not preserve nor respect the original and precious traditions of Chinese culture in the first place.
I don't know what other Chinese people think, but my blood boils whenever I see the frequent appearance of the bizarre homonyms in the simplified writing subtitles in many Chinese TV drama series. Although it should come as no surprise to see so many wrongly written characters and words in China, if you think about how the Chinese authorities have given such a senseless facelift to the original traditional Chinese writing by randomly selecting what to add or subtract, why would its people care to use accurately written characters or words?
The attitude from the top down is wrong to begin with.
Some proponents of simplified writing say that the opponents of simplified characters (and supporters of the traditional writing) are not open-minded enough, but the fact of the matter is, it is not about being receptive or flexible, it is about upholding our integrity and principles and about doing things right.
Other proponents suggest that it is not a big deal once we "get used to" the modified version, but that is not right either. First of all, people can also "get used to" the traditional writing, if they are required to. If the people of Hong Kong and Taiwan can handle the more complex traditional writing, why can't the Chinese? Do they not have the same level of intelligence? Secondly, the suggestion to "get used to"; what does it really mean? Wouldn't it be like "a lie told a hundred times becomes the truth?"
Why should we abandon an ideal system for a flawed replacement and pretend it is better? I have heard of yet another pathetic argument that those who have never learned traditional writing would never know what they have missed. But that is exactly the point that made me feel sorry for those people in China and all the foreign learners of the Chinese language who are unfortunate enough to be introduced only to the simplified writing but not the original, authentic and exquisite traditional writing.
I myself feel truly lucky and honored to have learned and to continue to use the traditional writing.
According to the Wikipedia Web site, even in China, traditional characters are still being used for ceremonies, cultural purposes (eg, calligraphy), decoration, some books on ancient literature and poetry, and commercial purposes such as shopfront displays and advertisements, though the latter is technically discouraged. Obviously, Chinese calligraphers need more strokes to work with for reason of aesthetics, which could only be satisfied by the traditional characters; while students, teachers, historians and other professionals need to know traditional writing to be able to do research on more ancient books and documents.
Now who can tell me why we need two Chinese writing systems when clearly one (traditional writing) is far superior to the other (simplified writing)?
Tennessee Gock
Albany, California
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with